Assistive Listening Knowledge Base
  • Peer-reviewed study (within-subject, repeated-measures)

Effects of Input Processing and Type of Personal Frequency Modulation System on Speech-Recognition Performance of Adults With Cochlear Implants

From https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wolfe-2013/ · record checked 9 October 2026

  • Wolfe J, Schafer E, Parkinson A, John A, Hudson M, Wheeler J, Mucci A
  • Ear and Hearing 34(1):52-62 (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)

Independent (first author at Hearts for Hearing, Oklahoma City, where participants were recruited; PubMed tags the study as having non-US-government research support without naming it; the other authors' affiliations and any funding statement are in the paywalled full text, which was not read; the processors tested were Cochlear's)

Summary

A study comparing a directly connected FM receiver with a neckloop into the telecoil of two Cochlear implant processors, for speech understanding in quiet and in noise.

Key findings

  • Adults with at least a year's implant use (15 in the first experiment, 16 in the second) used Cochlear's Nucleus Freedom and Nucleus 5 processors with a directly connected (direct audio input) FM receiver and with an induction neckloop receiver.
  • Speech recognition in quiet did not differ between the two FM systems or between the processor conditions.
  • With each processor, speech recognition in noise was better with the directly connected receiver than with the neckloop.
  • The Nucleus 5's multistage automatic sensitivity control gave better results than the single-stage approach; the authors conclude that speech recognition in noise depends substantially on the processor, the FM system and how automatic sensitivity control is applied.

Limits

Read from the publisher's abstract only; the full text could not be read. Personal FM receivers, not venue systems; one implant maker's processors of 2013.

Read the original

www.ovid.com/jnls/ear-hearing/abstract/10.1097/aud.0b013e3182611982~effects-of-input-processing-and-type-of-personal-frequency

Link checked . We link to the original and do not host copies.

Cited in

Cite this source

Wolfe J, Schafer E, Parkinson A, John A, Hudson M, Wheeler J, Mucci A. Effects of Input Processing and Type of Personal Frequency Modulation System on Speech-Recognition Performance of Adults With Cochlear Implants. Ear and Hearing 34(1):52-62 (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins). January 2013. https://www.ovid.com/jnls/ear-hearing/abstract/10.1097/aud.0b013e3182611982~effects-of-input-processing-and-type-of-personal-frequency (accessed 9 October 2026).

The accessed date is when this library last checked the link; use the date you read it. To point readers to this summary instead, link to https://assistivelisteningknowledgebase.org/evidence/wolfe-2013/

Every finding here cites its source, and who funded each source is labelled. This site does not recommend products. Found an error or a missing study? Suggest a correction.